Minelab EQUINOX Forum

QuoteHey guys, as you can see, I love the topic of whether or not someone can really learn the sounds of gold vs aluminum. To achieve ratios that exceed random chance, and that are not merely "notching" :

I should put a public reward out there ($10,000 or whatever) for anyone who can demonstrate the ability to show the difference, in a staged double blind test. Kind of like how the Amazing Randi put out his prize for anyone who could demonstrate psychic abilities.

So for example, a test garden of planted targets would be done with XX # of aluminum objects, and XX # of gold rings. And if the person does indeed get, a defined certain percent correct, (say, 2 out of 3), then the stage II of the test is to take the person to a junky urban park. Because, in theory, wouldn't they be able to have a 2 out of 3 ratio there too ?

Agreed Tom.

Now I'm not going to call anyone an outright liar. Maybe a bit of exaggeration, which is not unusual, but remember we have young hunters here that are taking your um... exaggerations more serious than they should. I'd probably feel safe adding another $10,000 to that kitty of anyone who could prove to be able to tell gold from aluminum with much more than the average 50/50 chance.

As a musician I fully understand tonal nuances, and after 50+ years feel I can do pretty good. I can take a completely out of tune guitar and put it back pretty darn close to A440. I feel I have a good ear when it comes to sound. I can tell by tone alone with pretty fair accuracy a clad dime from a silver, but I wouldn't give myself more than a 50/50 to tell a barber from merc. Now if the barber were worn very badly and the merc was like new, yeah I could up those odds. As far as gold vs aluminum Ehhh!

Oh, and I have found a lot of gold. I may not post near as much as I used to, I've found enough gold to put most beach hunters to shame, and that was in the dirt. but don't mistake that as nothing more than that I no longer bother to post unless it's something special or weird.

Quotesgoss66Charles, I always run fast off, deep off, and almost always Iron Mask 22. But I can clearly see how it could matter, tonally. I also do that "Minelab wiggle" that you describe, when I hit a good signal, allowing the machine to really "interrogate" the target. I run max manual sensitivity, and then run my gain at 8 (just to make deeper targets sound a tad "quieter" -- it's like using the depth gauge without having to look at it). That's the way I normally run my machine.

THANKS for the info on that the Tx, Rx, and then sensitivity, gain, etc. work with respect to the target signal. I roughly knew that, but it's great to be reminded...

Steve

Your settings sound perfect, I prefer deep on to boost deep targets, on the east coast stuff is deep really deep. I'd run my gain at 8 if the soil and rotted bits of iron allowed it, most times I have to lower it to 7 due to soil and bits of iron falsing. Gain of 8 will boost the signal on deep silver dimes from whisper to solid in volume so if I could run my gain at 8 without having to lower my sensitivity definitely. My sensitivity at most sites is between 26 and 28 manual. I try not to go lower than 26. 29 to 30 and I run into issues with rotted iron and mineralization falsing, you get where you can't see the forest for the trees.

I forgot to ask, Ferrous tones or Conductive?

Charles --

I like to run gain at 7 -- for the reason you said. But, I was advised by a long-time Explorer user not to go that low; he said at 7, you run the risk of missing the deepest targets. So I "deal with it," at 8, though it IS a noisy way to run, especially with sensitivity maxed out. Yes, indeed, at 32, I do run into issues with falsing just as you said, but I just try to get used to making that falsing "background white noise," and just really try to listen for any blip that sounds better than a false. I do sometimes wonder if I am "missing the forest for the trees" at some of the noisier spots I hunt (the more iron/rust infested spots).

I run conductive -- again, because that's what I learned from early on. The few times I've run ferrous, I will open the screen up entirely and do that. My concern with running ferrous is that many of the deeper coins in my iron-red clay soil often hit medium-high in terms of FE number. And so, if I have a silver dime lets say, hitting 14-29, if I am in conductive sounds that 29 CO is really catching my attention. But, if I am in ferrous sounds, and the machine is clueing off that 14 FE, it's more of a mid tone that might be less apt to stop me in my tracks. I don't know, I'd probably get used to it either way, and running totally open screen is something that I can understand the benefit of to some degree (instead of IM 22 in conductive...)

Quotesgoss66 .... That said, think about a Memorial cent, a wheat cent, and an Indian Head. ALL are supposed to be the same composition (or at least, the same amount of copper in each), but BOY do they read different. An 04-28 or 05-28 is a memorial penny on an Explorer (air test) while an Indian is an 07-24. Wheats are usually somewhere between, usually closer to the Memorial than the Indian Head. Makes no sense. .....

This has been an oft-discussed topic. Ie.: if the coin-book shows exact same composition of teens wheaties vs 40s/50s wheaties, then why do they sound different ? Same Q for IH's vs wheaties. In theory then, the sound should be the same , right ? But as we've all experienced, they read different.

Here's why: The source of the copper , over the differing decades, comes from different places. So for example Uncle Sam might be buying copper , on the open market, from Montana mining. And a few decades later, then next copper strike source could Arizona. And so forth. Therefore, since all metals contain trace elements even-after refining, those trace elements affect the TID. For example, notice that not all gold is the same. There's rose gold vs yellow gold, depending on where it was mined from. And the TID's can skew slightly between them, on a size-per-size basis comparison.

Tom,

I don't think I can buy this argument.

I agree with you totally that the source of copper (or gold) would mean different purities and compositions. HOWEVER, as you alluded to, after mining (from these different places with different types of metals mixed in with the ores) these metals are refined and "made pure," prior to alloying them, as I understand it, by the mint. While I agree that there could be traces of elements still there (probably would be), it would be MINUTE...certainly not enough to make the difference between 04-28 Memorial penny and 07-24 Indian Head (or an 03-25 1920s wheatie). There is just no way, in my mind, that if all three of these pennies are 95% copper (and then either 5% zinc, or 5% tin and zinc), there could be that drastic of a difference. Presume that the copper is, say, 99.96% pure, before being alloyed with zinc, or tin/zinc. You are telling me that that .04% impurity in the copper would change the ability of the coin to generate eddy currents SO MUCH, that you would alter the ID from 04-28 to 07-24?

I can't believe that's the answer.

And yet...we DO have the fact that SOMETHING is causing the difference...hmm...

Quotesgoss66Charles -- I like to run gain at 7 -- for the reason you said. But, I was advised by a long-time Explorer user not to go that low; he said at 7, you run the risk of missing the deepest targets. So I "deal with it," at 8, though it IS a noisy way to run, especially with sensitivity maxed out. Yes, indeed, at 32, I do run into issues with falsing just as you said, but I just try to get used to making that falsing "background white noise," and just really try to listen for any blip that sounds better than a false. I do sometimes wonder if I am "missing the forest for the trees" at some of the noisier spots I hunt (the more iron/rust infested spots).

I run conductive -- again, because that's what I learned from early on. The few times I've run ferrous, I will open the screen up entirely and do that. My concern with running ferrous is that many of the deeper coins in my iron-red clay soil often hit medium-high in terms of FE number. And so, if I have a silver dime lets say, hitting 14-29, if I am in conductive sounds that 29 CO is really catching my attention. But, if I am in ferrous sounds, and the machine is clueing off that 14 FE, it's more of a mid tone that might be less apt to stop me in my tracks. I don't know, I'd probably get used to it either way, and running totally open screen is something that I can understand the benefit of to some degree (instead of IM 22 in conductive...)

Steve

I can confirm that, you do run a risk of passing deep silver with the gain at 7, I walked passed a silver dime once that was so faint I took 3 steps before it registered. Returned to that target, bumped my gain to 8 and night and day difference in the volume of the target. On the iron mask try this, after finding a target running IM 22 before you dig switch to IM all metal and sweep it again, note any differences in tone, ease of pinpointing. I had to ease into all metal by doing this, leaping directly into all metal was too overwhelming there's so much iron on the east coast. In time all the low iron signals in Ferrous tones became my threshold I don't really pay any attention to them.

Conductive vs Ferrous tones, could that be the difference between hearing a gold tone vs not who knows I never tested it. There are so many variables that have not been tested I don't think someone can make a broad brush statement that its not possible, especially with so many field reports that it is. That's my final word on it.

What's next, I could start a raging debate how the Explorer will null in all metal over a silver coin spill that might get people riled up.

Southwind and charlie, I see I had a typo in my offer to fly charlie out. It said "I will fly out....". I meant to say: "I will fly YOU out ..."

So Charlie, if you ever want a nice all expense paid trip to SF, my offer still stands Just show me it can be done.

Oh, and I notice you're saying you're doing this on the "Beach" ? Well, let's be clear here: The gold ratios on the beach are, for starters, going to be much higher. And if a person started applying notching (which, I know you're denying your system is notching), then the #'s could indeed go up.

But I was wanting this applied to land . Eg.: turf.

Southwind: Ok, we've got $20k reward money so far in this kitty. We just have to make the standards. Eg.: xx # of targets, and the person must tell which on is a gold ring. And I would have 3 different beds, of which one of the beds has zero gold rings. So they tell which bed is nothing but aluminum. and And whatever ratio the person accomplishes (assuming it appears to be better-than-random chance,), then stage II of the test is to go into a park, to show if they accomplish anything notable on a "wild" hunt.

We had a rare opportunity, at a park that dates to the 1870s, which is now in a blighted part of a big city: They tore out all the grass in 2006, to put in artificial turf. We got hundreds of silver coins, thousands of wheaties, Buffs, V's, IH's, etc.... And since it was a demolition site (all torn up), we had the liberty to "dig all" (everything at all that was conductive even down to foil). And for 3 weeks, I kept every single target from each night, in buckets.

When it was all over, I made a count of the A) gold items and B) aluminum junk. And yes, I had 8 or 9 gold items: several rings, a charm, a pocket watch back, earing, etc..... And the aluminum was something like 2000 targets. So, as you can see, it simply would not pay to hunt blighted parks like this for gold rings. Once you add the zinc, the clad, car keys, lead globs , etc... The ratio of gold items to other-items was just too prohibitive. Hence the reason a lot of md'rs just ply parks for old silver coins. And might elect to skip foil, tabs, etc... (if shallow anyhow).

There might be types turf (upscale soccer fields, etc...) that aren't "blighted". So I would even accept that the stage II of the test be done where it's not a junkyard. Like a newer 1940s/50s school or athletic field.

Quotesgoss66 .... That said, think about a Memorial cent, a wheat cent, and an Indian Head. ALL are supposed to be the same composition (or at least, the same amount of copper in each), but BOY do they read different. An 04-28 or 05-28 is a memorial penny on an Explorer (air test) while an Indian is an 07-24. Wheats are usually somewhere between, usually closer to the Memorial than the Indian Head. Makes no sense. .....

This has been an oft-discussed topic. Ie.: if the coin-book shows exact same composition of teens wheaties vs 40s/50s wheaties, then why do they sound different ? Same Q for IH's vs wheaties. In theory then, the sound should be the same , right ? But as we've all experienced, they read different.

Here's why: The source of the copper , over the differing decades, comes from different places. So for example Uncle Sam might be buying copper , on the open market, from Montana mining. And a few decades later, then next copper strike source could Arizona. And so forth. Therefore, since all metals contain trace elements even-after refining, those trace elements affect the TID. For example, notice that not all gold is the same. There's rose gold vs yellow gold, depending on where it was mined from. And the TID's can skew slightly between them, on a size-per-size basis comparison.

Tom,

I don't think I can buy this argument.

I agree with you totally that the source of copper (or gold) would mean different purities and compositions. HOWEVER, as you alluded to, after mining (from these different places with different types of metals mixed in with the ores) these metals are refined and "made pure," prior to alloying them, as I understand it, by the mint. While I agree that there could be traces of elements still there (probably would be), it would be MINUTE...certainly not enough to make the difference between 04-28 Memorial penny and 07-24 Indian Head (or an 03-25 1920s wheatie). There is just no way, in my mind, that if all three of these pennies are 95% copper (and then either 5% zinc, or 5% tin and zinc), there could be that drastic of a difference. Presume that the copper is, say, 99.96% pure, before being alloyed with zinc, or tin/zinc. You are telling me that that .04% impurity in the copper would change the ability of the coin to generate eddy currents SO MUCH, that you would alter the ID from 04-28 to 07-24?

I can't believe that's the answer.

And yet...we DO have the fact that SOMETHING is causing the difference...hmm...

Steve

Steve

Most Indians are bronze 95% copper, 3% tin, and 2% zinc, with 1859-1864 being the thick nickel variety 88% copper, 12% nickel. Its enough to pull them down and away from where wheat cents ID on the Smartfind screen. Bronze variety deep, all green with the thick hard crust ID even lower. I never dug one until I was just digging on depth one day, then I dug hundreds of the useless slugs all destroyed by corrosion. One side nice details, the other side obliterated. lol

Quotesgoss66 ....I agree that there could be traces of elements still there (probably would be), it would be MINUTE...certainly not enough to make the difference between 04-28 Memorial penny and 07-24 Indian Head (or an 03-25 1920s wheatie)....

Interesting topic. I too would think that .... copper is copper is copper, no matter its source. And that "trace elements" (from different geographic locales) should be "trace" (small) enough to have negligible difference in the TID.

But it was an answer someone gave on a forum thread on the subject. So ... If they're wrong, I dunno what the answer is. Because you're right: A quick glance at the coin book shows IHs, teens wheats, and '50s wheats all have the same composition, weight, and size. Yet as we know, they read slightly different. Even when not having been buried first (ie.: straight out of someone's coin collection).

QuoteCharles (Upstate NY)I can confirm that, you do run a risk of passing deep silver with the gain at 7, I walked passed a silver dime once that was so faint I took 3 steps before it registered. Returned to that target, bumped my gain to 8 and night and day difference in the volume of the target. On the iron mask try this, after finding a target running IM 22 before you dig switch to IM all metal and sweep it again, note any differences in tone, ease of pinpointing. I had to ease into all metal by doing this, leaping directly into all metal was too overwhelming there's so much iron on the east coast. In time all the low iron signals in Ferrous tones became my threshold I don't really pay any attention to them.

Conductive vs Ferrous tones, could that be the difference between hearing a gold tone vs not who knows I never tested it. There are so many variables that have not been tested I don't think someone can make a broad brush statement that its not possible, especially with so many field reports that it is. That's my final word on it.

What's next, I could start a raging debate how the Explorer will null in all metal over a silver coin spill that might get people riled up.

Charles, I have done that on occasion -- switching to all metal after locating a target. I keep my background "discrimination pattern" as an open screen, and then hunt IM 22. That way, if I want to check a target in all metal, I just hit the iron mask button to turn the mask off, and I am in open screen.

I have tried hunting open screen conductive, but NO WAY can I do it. I last about 5 minutes!! UGH! NOT in conductive. Too many high-toning nails sound too good (until you look at the screen and see 25-29 as your FE-CO number! LOL. In ferrous sounds, I can do it. And if I did it often, I could certainly see how, like you said, the low iron tones nearly constant in your ears could become sort of a "threshold." No doubt. But man, I love that nice high-tone sound of silver so much, that I'd hate to have that 14-29 FE-CO deep dime I mentioned give me a MID tone (keying off of that 14 FE); I want a deep silver dime to high-tone "tinkle," not sound like a rectangular tab!!! LOL!

QuoteTom_in_CASouthwind and charlie, I see I had a typo in my offer to fly charlie out. It said "I will fly out....". I meant to say: "I will fly YOU out ..."

So Charlie, if you ever want a nice all expense paid trip to SF, my offer still stands Just show me it can be done.

Oh, and I notice you're saying you're doing this on the "Beach" ? Well, let's be clear here: The gold ratios on the beach are, for starters, going to be much higher. And if a person started applying notching (which, I know you're denying your system is notching), then the #'s could indeed go up.

But I was wanting this applied to land . Eg.: turf.

Southwind: Ok, we've got $20k reward money so far in this kitty. We just have to make the standards. Eg.: xx # of targets, and the person must tell which on is a gold ring. And I would have 3 different beds, of which one of the beds has zero gold rings. So they tell which bed is nothing but aluminum. and And whatever ratio the person accomplishes (assuming it appears to be better-than-random chance,), then stage II of the test is to go into a park, to show if they accomplish anything notable on a "wild" hunt.

We had a rare opportunity, at a park that dates to the 1870s, which is now in a blighted part of a big city: They tore out all the grass in 2006, to put in artificial turf. We got hundreds of silver coins, thousands of wheaties, Buffs, V's, IH's, etc.... And since it was a demolition site (all torn up), we had the liberty to "dig all" (everything at all that was conductive even down to foil). And for 3 weeks, I kept every single target from each night, in buckets.

When it was all over, I made a count of the A) gold items and B) aluminum junk. And yes, I had 8 or 9 gold items: several rings, a charm, a pocket watch back, earing, etc..... And the aluminum was something like 2000 targets. So, as you can see, it simply would not pay to hunt blighted parks like this for gold rings. Once you add the zinc, the clad, car keys, lead globs , etc... The ratio of gold items to other-items was just too prohibitive. Hence the reason a lot of md'rs just ply parks for old silver coins. And might elect to skip foil, tabs, etc... (if shallow anyhow).

There might be types turf (upscale soccer fields, etc...) that aren't "blighted". So I would even accept that the stage II of the test be done where it's not a junkyard. Like a newer 1940s/50s school or athletic field.

So Charlie, not only an all expense paid trip, but a $20 k reward too

A trip to San Francisco you say, or I could drive a few hours and go dig these...

I once worked for a company that had its own foundry melting large caldrons of cast iron and stainless alloys, you might be surprised by how much only a trace amount of something can change an alloy those foundry guys had to test every melt and adjust. But you could test your theory, sand an Indian and Wheat flat and smooth on both sides and test, same diameter, same thickness, should sound/ID the same in your test case.